EUS-guided drainage using hepaticocolostomy after esogastrectomy.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hedjoudje A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7947329 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ERCP is the current procedure of choice for patients with jaundice caused by biliary obstruction. EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) has emerged as an alternative to ERCP in patients requiring biliary drainage. The aim of the study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to report the overall efficacy and safety of EUS-BD. We conducted a comprehensive search of several databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and LILACS databases (earliest inception to June 2018) to identify studies that reported EUS-BD in patients. The primary outcome was to look at the technical and clinical success of the procedure. The secondary analysis focused on calculating the pooled rate of re-interventions and all adverse-events, along with the commonly reported adverse-event subtypes. Twenty-three studies reporting on 1437 patients were identified undergoing 1444 procedures. Majority of the patient population were male (53.86%), with an average age of 67.22 years. The pooled technical success rates and clinical success rates were 91.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87.7-94.2, I[2] = 76.5) and 87% (95% CI: 82.3-90.6, I[2] = 72.4), respectively. The total adverse event rates were 17.9% (95% CI: 14.3-22.2, I[2] = 69.1). Subgroup analysis of three major individual adverse events was bile leak: 4.1% (2.7-6.2, I[2] = 46.7), stent migration: 3.9% (2.5-6.2, I[2] = 43.5), and infection: 3.8% (2.8-5.1, I[2] = 0) Substantial heterogeneity was noted in the analysis. EUS-BD has high technical and clinical success rate and hence a very effective procedure. Concerns about publication bias exist. Careful consideration should be given to the adverse events and weighing the risks and benefits of the alternative nonsurgical/surgical approaches.
| S-EPMC7279084 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesEUS-guided pelvic abscess drainage (EUS-PAD) is a procedure that utilizes an echoendoscope to visualize an area of interest for needle insertion and placement of a stent, catheter, or both for drainage of the target abscess. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis for the safety and efficacy of EUS-PAD.Materials and methodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of several databases and conference proceedings including PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science databases (earliest inception to February 2020). The primary outcomes for this study were the technical and clinical success of EUS-PAD. The secondary outcomes assessed for this study were adverse events of the procedure and subgroup analysis of individual adverse events.ResultsEight studies with a total of 135 patients combined were included in our analysis. The rate of technical success was 100% and the calculated pooled rate of clinical success was 92% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87%, 98%; P = 0.31; I2 = 15%). The calculated pooled rate of adverse events was 9.4% (±17.9%), with stent migration (5.5 ± 18.06%) being the most common adverse event.ConclusionEUS-PAD offers a viable alternative that can minimize the need for surgical intervention in the drainage of pelvic abscesses. EUS-PAD has also demonstrated long-term clinical success with an acceptable rate of complications.
| S-EPMC8248303 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsEUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) can be used to treat acute cholecystitis in patients with medical comorbidities that prevent definitive operative management. Historically, nonsurgical management of cholecystitis was achieved by way of percutaneous gallbladder drainage.MethodsWe examined the periprocedural bleeding rate of EUS-GBD for acute cholecystitis using lumen-apposing metal stents in 5 high-surgical-risk patients requiring anticoagulation. Data on 5 nonoperative candidates with acute cholecystitis who underwent EUS-GBD were studied retrospectively.ResultsThere were no immediate or delayed postprocedure adverse events, including bleeding.ConclusionsAlthough further study is needed, EUS-GBD appears safe in patients who require periprocedural anticoagulation.
| S-EPMC7572616 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Video 1Single-session EDGE with ERCP and EUS gallbladder drainage.
| S-EPMC8573714 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and Objectives:EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a feasible procedure when ERCP fails, as is percutaneous transhepatic BD (PTBD). However, little is known about patient perception and preference of EUS-BD and PTBD. Patients and Methods:An international multicenter survey was conducted in seven tertiary referral centers. In total, 327 patients, scheduled to undergo ERCP for suspected malignant biliary obstruction, were enrolled in the study. Patients received decision aids with visual representation regarding the techniques, benefits, and adverse events (AEs) of EUS-BD and PTBD. Patients were then asked the choice between the two simulated scenarios (EUS-BD or PTBD) after failed ERCP, the reasons for their preference, and whether altering AE rates would influence their prior choice. Results:In total, 313 patients (95.7%) responded to the questionnaire and 251 patients (80.2%) preferred EUS-BD. The preference of EUS-BD was 85.7% (186/217) with EUS-BD expertise, compared to 67.7% (65/96) without EUS-BD expertise (P < 0.001). The main reason for choosing EUS-BD was the possibility of internal drainage (78.1%). In multivariate analysis, the availability of EUS-BD expertise was the single independent factor that influenced patient preference (odds ratio: 3.168; 95% of confidence interval, 1.714-5.856; P < 0.001). The preference of EUS-BD increased as AE rates decreased (P < 0.001). Conclusions:In this simulated scenario, approximately 80% of patients preferred EUS-BD over PTBD after failed ERCP. However, preference of EUS-BD declined as its AE rates increased. Further technical innovations and improved proficiency in EUS-BD for reducing AEs may encourage the use of this procedure as a routine clinical practice when ERCP fails.
| S-EPMC5838728 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsPelvic fluid collections (PFCs) are frequent adverse events of abdominal surgery or inflammatory conditions. A percutaneous approach to deep PFCs could be challenging and result in a longer, painful recovery. The transvaginal approach has been considered easy but is limited by the difficulty of leaving a stent in place. The transrectal approach has been described, but issues related to fecal contamination were hypothesized. Data on EUS-guided transrectal drainage (EUS-TRD) with lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) are few and suggest unsatisfactory outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EUS-TRD with LAMSs in patients with PFCs.MethodsA retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database on therapeutic EUS was conducted. All EUS-TRD procedures were included.ResultsFive patients (2 male, age 44-89 years) were included. Four patients had postoperative PFCs, and 1 presented with a pelvic abscess complicating acute diverticulitis. Two of 5 had fecal diversion; the remaining 3 had unaltered large-bowel anatomy. One case had a concomitant abdominal collection, treated with percutaneous drainage in the same session. An electrocautery-enhanced LAMS delivery system (15 × 10 mm) was used in all cases. EUS-TRD was performed with the direct-puncture technique and lasted less than 10 minutes in 4 cases; in the remaining case, needle puncture and LAMS placement over a guidewire was required, and the procedure length was 14 minutes. The clinical success rate was 100%. LAMSs were removed after a median of 14 (range, 12-24) days. One patient reported partial proximal LAMS migration after 24 days (mild adverse event). No PFC recurrence was observed.ConclusionEUS-TRD with LAMSs is a safe and effective technique for treatment of PFCs. The use of 15- × 10-mm LAMSs allows rapid PFC resolution. EUS-TRD could be performed not only in patients with fecal diversion but also in cases of unaltered anatomy.
| S-EPMC7426890 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is a lack of consensus on how endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided pseudocyst drainage should be performed. This survey was carried out amongst members of the Asian Endoscopic Ultrasonography Group (AEG) to describe their practices in performing this procedure.MethodsThis was an Asia wide multi-institutional survey amongst members of the Asian EUS group conducted between November and December 2013. The responses to a 19-question survey with regard to the practice of pseudocyst drainage were obtained.ResultsIn total, 19 endoscopists responded to the questionnaire and the mean (SD) number of procedures performed by each endoscopist was 87.95 (40); 42.2?% believed that prior endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is required and pancreatic duct stenting is indicated in patients with pancreatic duct disruption; 47.4?% used tapered catheters for track dilation and 42.1?% used the cystotome; 84.1?% would dilate the track up to 8 to 10?mm in size. Metallic stents were used by 10.5?% of the respondents and transcystic catheters were employed by 26.3?%. Those who were more experienced in the procedure tended to use the cystotome more frequently (P?=?0.02) and removed the stents in less than 3 months after insertion (P?=?0.011).ConclusionThis was the first Asia wide survey in the practice of pseudocyst drainage. There were wide variations in practice and randomized studies are urgently needed to establish the best approach for management of this condition. There is also a pressing need for establishment of a consensus for safe practices.
| S-EPMC4477027 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Video 1EUS-guided pancreatic drainage using the rendezvous technique in a patient with pancreaticojejunal anastomosis stenosis and pancreatic duct stone.
| S-EPMC8573592 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8544007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Results of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUBD) are unknown in case of proximal stricture. The aim is to assess clinical outcomes of EUBD in patients with malignant hilar obstruction.Patients undergoing EUBD with hilar strictures were prospectively included. Primary outcome was clinical success at 7 and 30 days (defined by 50% bilirubin decrease). Secondary outcomes were technical success, procedure-related complications, length of hospital stay, reintervention rate, survival and chemotherapy administration.Eighteen patients with a mean age of 68.8 years were included. On 15 classable stenosis, 7 (47%) were noted Bismuth I-II, 7 (47%) Bismuth III, and 1 (6.7%) Bismuth IV. Reasons for EUBD were surgically modified anatomy in 10 patients (55.6%), impassable stricture at ERCP in 7 (38.9%) and duodenal obstruction in 1 (5.6%). Only hepaticogastrostomy was performed. Clinical success was at day 7 and 30 respectively 72.2% and 68.8%. Technical success was 94%. Complications occurred in 3 (16.7%) patients. Median (range) length of hospital stay was 10 (6-35) days. Reintervention rate was 16.7%. Median (range) survival was 79 (5-390) days. Chemotherapy was possible in 10 (55.6%) patients.EUBD is feasible for hilar obstruction for surgically altered anatomy or after ERCP failure. Clinical outcome is satisfactory when considering underlying advanced disease, allowing chemotherapy.
| S-EPMC5484435 | biostudies-other